🚀 go-pugleaf

Steven Gershenfeld (sger...@merle.acns.nwu.edu) wrote:
: In article <3st708$7...@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>,
: Alexander O. Norris  <a...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
: >
: >>Since Win95 is already past due, by quite a few months, you lose this 
: >>bet as soon as the first person takes it.
: >>
: >>
: >-------Goddamn you  guys are stupider than i thought.  Read my original
: >post, and you would see that i said "i bet 10 or 20 bux that Windows 95
: >will come out in 95".     NO PLACE DID I MENTION THE ORIGINAL RELEASE
: >DATE.  "Windows 95 will come out in 95" means just that, got it?  Damn,
: >you ppl are stupid.
: >    And to all ppl who did reply to my wager, lets have the wording say
: >"Windows 95 will be released in 1995 as a stable platform."  Whether or
: >not MS releases Win95 v1.01 or not by Dec. 31 does not matter in the
: >wager, by patches or upgrades or whatever.  WHY?  because they already
: >have made it clear that additions will be shipped within a few months
: >after Aug. 24.  Yes, it sounds like a cop-out on MS's part (and I'll
: >admit that is partially is), BUT Win95 will be stable by Dec. 31.      
: >
: >     And who determines the stability of a product anyway?  Also, how?

: Ooh boy.  I took the liberty of going back and finding your original
: post.

: Here it is (edited for brevity, only contains your statement...)

: [START]

: --------Joel, I'm betting OS/2 zealots this because I'm sick and tired
: of hearing and seeing Win96, Win97, Win98, Win9x, to imply that Win95
: will not be out on time.  IT WILL BE, and to throw in a bit of
: excitement, I'm willing to bet $20.  Anytakers?

: [END]

: I don't see anywhere that you state that your bet is that is
: will "come out in 95", but that it come "out on TIME".  Now whether
: you MEANT that it will come out in 1995 is immaterial.  Your 
: statement is quite vague in its meaning.  I can see quite easily that
: most people would interpret it as having it coming out when Microsoft
: originally said it would (Microsoft has apologized in its newsletter
: for not getting it OUT ON TIME.)  It is obviously more important to
: Microsoft to try to get all the bugs out then getting it out on time,
: which is good, IMHO.

: Most computer programs do not come out on time, and Windows 95 is
: no exception.   I am happy they didn't put it out on time, because
: it was extremely buggy in 94.  I am willing to wait for them to make
: it as bug free as possible.  So Microsoft not getting it out ON TIME
: is not neccessarily a bad thing at all.

: Also it's not usually proper to change the wording of a bet in
: the middle.  Most people get kinda angry at that... :-)

: Steven

I totally agree. It seems that those who argue about how bad win95 is, they
are the ones that want it first. They just can't wait to see it.

Daniel